Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Aijun Wang
Hi, Peter: Currently, we have the following consideration: 1. If not all of the ABRs announce the unreachability of the specified prefix(the specified prefix is still up), such PUA information will continue advertising by the unreachable ABRs. 2. If all of the ABRs announce the PUA of the

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Aijun, On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Currently, we have the following consideration: 1. If not all of the ABRs announce the unreachability of the specified prefix(the specified prefix is still up), such PUA information will continue advertising by the unreachable ABRs.

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Ajun, one additional problem on top of others that have been mentioned is how are you going to get rid of "old" un-reachability announcements/ Let's imagine you have the following prefixes in your area 1: - 10.10.0.1/32 - 10.0.0.255/32 - used for loopback adresses - 10.10.1.0/30 -

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Aijun Wang
Hi, Peter: Aijun Wang China Telecom > On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: > > Hi Aijun, > >> On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: >> Hi, Peter: >> Currently, we have the following consideration: >> 1. If not all of the ABRs announce the unreachability of the specified >>

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Aijun Wang
Hi, Acee: Aijun Wang China Telecom > On Jul 31, 2020, at 01:45, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > >  > On 7/30/20, 1:31 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" > wrote: > > > >On 7/30/20, 12:37 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak" > wrote: > >>On 30/07/2020 18:03, Acee Lindem

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Aijun Wang
Hi, Robert: Aijun Wang China Telecom > On Jul 31, 2020, at 00:23, Robert Raszuk wrote: > >  > Hi, > > Imagine I have two ABRs connecting area 1 to area 0. One is signalling > transition to down for subset of summary and the other does not .. maybe it > is slow ... maybe it does not support

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Huzhibo
HI acee: PUA does not advertise reachable or unreachable details, it advertise events with prefix from up to down. thanks Zhibo -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com 发件人:Acee Lindem

Re: [Lsr] Gather town hallway chats.

2020-07-30 Thread Christian Hopps
For the curious To join gather.town goto the IETF 108 page: https://www.ietf.org/how/meetings/108/ and click "Join Gather". Thanks, Chris. > On Jul 30, 2020, at 12:09 PM, Christian Hopps wrote: > > Hi, > > If anyone would like to have a post meeting

Re: [Lsr] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02.txt

2020-07-30 Thread bruno.decraene
Hi Tony, Thanks for the updated draft. “ The Area SID Sub-TLV allows the Area Leader to advertise a SID that represents the entirety of the Inside Area to the Outside Area. This sub-TLV is learned by all of the Inside Edge Nodes who should consume this SID at forwarding time.”

[Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02

2020-07-30 Thread bruno.decraene
Hi authors, Please find below some feedback for information. Feel free to ignore. 4.4.13. The Area SID https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02#section-4.4.13 "The following extensions to the Binding TLV are defined in order to support Area SID: A new flag

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
So, how do we define a reachable route - is it any route subsumed by the summary LSA that we knew about in the past that becomes unreachable? When the PUA is withdrawn, how do we know whether it is because of expiration of the interval or the route becoming reachable again? This is a slippery

[Lsr] Gather town hallway chats.

2020-07-30 Thread Christian Hopps
Hi, If anyone would like to have a post meeting hallway chat now that our meeting slot has ended, I'll be hanging out in the IETF gather.town for the next 20 minutes or so. Thanks, Chris. signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP ___

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Robert Raszuk
Hi, Imagine I have two ABRs connecting area 1 to area 0. One is signalling transition to down for subset of summary and the other does not .. maybe it is slow ... maybe it does not support this new feature. So all routers in the area 0 are receiving a full summary from one ABR and a summary with

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
On 30/07/2020 18:03, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: So, how do we define a reachable route - is it any route subsumed by the summary LSA that we knew about in the past that becomes unreachable? When the PUA is withdrawn, how do we know whether it is because of expiration of the interval or the

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Huzhibo
hi: if abr1 advertise pua but abr2 not,other node will think the prefix is reachable via abr2. and will not advertise pua to other area. I am not idea how bgp can work?keepalive expire?bfd?maybe bfd can work.local policy verification?some usecase maybe yes.

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
Hi Zhibo, From: Lsr on behalf of Huzhibo Date: Thursday, July 30, 2020 at 12:14 PM To: Acee Lindem , Peter Psenak , Robert Raszuk Cc: lsr , Aijun Wang , Xiaoyaqun , Aijun Wang Subject: Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt HI acee:

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Huzhibo
HI Peter: sure,we will cansider all the possible better solution.thanks for your suggestion. zhibo -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email: huzh...@huawei.com 发件人:Peter Psenak 收件人:Huzhibo ;Aijun Wang 抄 送:Aijun

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Robert Raszuk
Hey Peter, Not sure how smart you really want to be here but keep in mind that BGP say option C may never hear about it all the way to the egress PE in other domain or area ... It is almost always incongruent with IGP. So if the BGP path is installed it will indeed be at risk to resolve via less

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
On 30/07/2020 16:30, Robert Raszuk wrote: Hey Peter, Not sure how smart you really want to be here but keep in mind that BGP say option C may never hear about it all the way to the egress PE in other domain or area ... It is almost always incongruent with IGP. So if the BGP path is

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Aijun, On 30/07/2020 14:28, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Aijun Wang China Telecom On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Aijun, On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Currently, we have the following consideration: 1. If not all of the ABRs announce the

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Huzhibo, On 30/07/2020 14:49, Huzhibo wrote: Hi peter: On 30/07/2020 14:28, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Aijun Wang China Telecom On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: Hi Aijun, On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: Hi, Peter: Currently, we have the following consideration:

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
On 30/07/2020 16:14, Robert Raszuk wrote: > 2:For bgp example,when the pe node down,the bgp peer must down within > 30 mintus,It will not get it up via cancle advertise pua. for the above it is sufficient to advertise the unreachability for few seconds from each ABR

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Huzhibo
Hi peter: On 30/07/2020 14:28, Aijun Wang wrote: > Hi, Peter: > > Aijun Wang > China Telecom > >> On Jul 30, 2020, at 20:00, Peter Psenak wrote: >> >> Hi Aijun, >> >>> On 30/07/2020 13:44, Aijun Wang wrote: >>> Hi, Peter: >>> Currently, we have the following consideration: >>> 1. If not all

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Huzhibo
HI Peter: 1:No problem is a problem that never can be proved. 2:For bgp example,when the pe node down,the bgp peer must down within 30 mintus,It will not get it up via cancle advertise pua. ZHIBO -- 胡志波 Hu Zhibo Mobile: +86-18618192287 Email:

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Peter Psenak
Hi Zhibo, On 30/07/2020 15:18, Huzhibo wrote: HI Peter: 1:No problem is a problem that never can be proved. 2:For bgp example,when the pe node down,the bgp peer must down within 30 mintus,It will not get it up via cancle advertise pua. for the above it is sufficient to advertise the

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Robert Raszuk
> > 2:For bgp example,when the pe node down,the bgp peer must down within > > 30 mintus,It will not get it up via cancle advertise pua. > > for the above it is sufficient to advertise the unreachability for few > seconds from each ABR independently. That would be a much more solid > proposal.

Re: [Lsr] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Bruno – One of the reasons to use the Binding TLV to advertise the Area SID was that it has been suggested that other use cases for Area SID – unrelated to Area Proxy – may come along. Therefore tying the advertisement to an Area Proxy TLV seems not the best option if we want to allow for

Re: [Lsr] draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02

2020-07-30 Thread Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)
Bruno - Regarding the A-flag... It may not matter much whichever way we decide - but the A-flag was invented because at the time (prior to RFC 7794) there was no way to determine from looking at a prefix reachability advertisement whether it was originated by the advertising node or had been

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
On 7/30/20, 12:37 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak" wrote: On 30/07/2020 18:03, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > So, how do we define a reachable route - is it any route subsumed by the summary LSA that we knew about in the past that becomes unreachable? When the PUA is withdrawn, how

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-wang-lsr-prefix-unreachable-annoucement-03.txt

2020-07-30 Thread Acee Lindem (acee)
On 7/30/20, 1:31 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Acee Lindem (acee)" wrote: On 7/30/20, 12:37 PM, "Lsr on behalf of Peter Psenak" wrote: On 30/07/2020 18:03, Acee Lindem (acee) wrote: > So, how do we define a reachable route - is it any route subsumed by the summary LSA that we

Re: [Lsr] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-lsr-isis-area-proxy-02.txt

2020-07-30 Thread tony . li
Hi Bruno, Thank you for your comments. > On Jul 30, 2020, at 9:22 AM, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote: > > Hi Tony, > > Thanks for the updated draft. > > “ The Area SID Sub-TLV allows the Area Leader to advertise a SID that >represents the entirety of the Inside Area to the Outside